Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30008798›Full record

ReviewComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2018

Information-Based Medicine in Glioma Patients: A Clinical Perspective.

Joeky Tamba Senders, Maya Harary, Brittany Morgan Stopa, Patrick Staples, Marike Lianne Daphne Broekman, Timothy Richard Smith, William Brian Gormley, Omar Arnaout

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Joeky Tamba SendersComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Maya HararyComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Brittany Morgan StopaComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Patrick StaplesDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
Marike Lianne Daphne BroekmanComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Timothy Richard SmithComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
William Brian GormleyComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Omar ArnaoutComputational Neuroscience Outcomes Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3890-8615

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glioma constitutes the most common type of primary brain tumor with a dismal survival, often measured in terms of months or years. The thin line between treatment effectiveness and patient harm underpins the importance of tailoring clinical management to the individual patient. Randomized trials have laid the foundation for many neuro-oncological guidelines. Despite this, their findings focus on group-level estimates. Given our current tools, we are limited in our ability to guide patients on what therapy is best for them as individuals, or even how long they should expect to survive. Machine learning, however, promises to provide the analytical support for personalizing treatment decisions, and deep learning allows clinicians to unlock insight from the vast amount of unstructured data that is collected on glioma patients. Although these novel techniques have achieved astonishing results across a variety of clinical applications, significant hurdles remain associated with the implementation of them in clinical practice. Future challenges include the assembly of well-curated cross-institutional datasets, improvement of the interpretability of machine learning models, and balancing novel evidence-based decision-making with the associated liability of automated inference. Although artificial intelligence already exceeds clinical expertise in a variety of applications, clinicians remain responsible for interpreting the implications of, and acting upon, each prediction.

Indexed as

Machine LearningPrecision MedicineBrain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaGliomaHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, Local

Identifiers

PMID30008798
PMCPMC6020490

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.